Whatever Happened to Simultaneity? Transnational Migration Theory and Dual Engagement in Sending and Receiving Countries

Abstract

The transnationalism literature has focused on the transborder social networks that immigrants in the receiving country maintain with their sending countries and has not sufficiently examined how such transborder connections enable them to become simultaneously engaged in both nation-states. This paper argues that simultaneity is an important part of transnationalism that distinguishes it from long-distance nationalism. We therefore need to more extensively analyse how immigrants’ transborder involvement in their home country simultaneously affects their participation in the host country. I suggest four ways in which the dynamic relationship between home- and host-country engagement can be conceived. The first is a zero-sum relationship, where increased engagement in one country leads to decreased involvement in the other. The second involves the side-by-side co-existence of sending- and receiving-country engagement without one directly influencing the other. The third is a positively reinforcing relationship, where increased engagement in one country leads to increased involvement in the other. The final option is a negatively reinforcing relationship. I illustrate these four types of transnational simultaneity with examples of migrant socio-economic, political, cultural and identity transnationalism. Finally I discuss their implications for the long-term engagement of immigrants in both sending and receiving countries.

Keywords:

• Transnational
• Transborder
• Immigration
• Migration
• Assimilation

Notes

1. This refers to the strengthening of nationalist attachments among people living outside the territorial borders of their nation-state.

2. For instance, Portes (2003: 886) notes that downward occupational mobility for immigrants actually reduces the probability that they will become a transnational entrepreneur.

3. Sometimes, such identities are referred to as both transnational and national, exacerbating the confusion.

4. Guarnizo and Díaz (1999: 414–15) also find that more ‘successful’ immigrants who are better-integrated in the United States develop a more transnational identity. However, Basch et al. (1994) claim that Haitian immigrants construct transnational identifications despite their generally unskilled social status and the racial discrimination they face in the United States.

5. As Waldinger and Fitzgerald note (2004), immigrant transnational practices are structured by international political constraints.

6. Likewise, Kivisto (2001) claims that assimilation theory (broadly conceived) is capable of incorporating transnationalism as a variant.